17th Century Puzzle

bluelake · 25th May 2010, 12:57 AM

Thanks, Philip! The information is greatly appreciated and very informative. I will look into the books you mentioned.

It's interesting to note that, in Korea, the bow remained an official military weapon until the mid-1890s, but was probably not officially used in battle after the 1860s. In the US military incursion of 1871, although there were bows in Korea's arsenal (at least on paper), none were used and none captured by the US. In the French incursion of 1866, there is evidence they were still being used militarily and at least one was captured by the French (That bow was given to me almost a decade ago by a friend in France and I gave it to the Korean Army Museum).

Thomas
http://www.shinmiyangyo.org

Philip · 25th May 2010, 07:33 AM

Thomas,
John L. Boots, in his monograph KOREAN WEAPONS AND ARMOUR (Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, Korea Branch, 1934), mentions that of all the martial arts, archery was the most esteemed in pre-modern Korea. I find it interesting to note that this particular affection for the bow and arrow is also a defining characteristic of the martial cultures of the Manchus, Mongols, and Turks -- peoples, who along with the Koreans are members of the Ural-Altaic linguistic family. Put a Korean composite-recurved bow next to an Ottoman one and you'll see weapons of almost identical proportions (distinct from Manchu, Sino-Tibetan, and Indian bows) and performance characteristics. The Korean and Turkish weapons are known for their ability to shoot very light arrows at velocities and over distances unmatched by the bows of other nations. Our colleague Peter Dekker is a wealth of info on this subject and I suggest that you contact him if you have further interest.

Philip · 25th May 2010, 07:47 AM

Thomas,
Like the Koreans, the Chinese under Qing rule maintained their tradition of military archery (at least in theory) until quite late. Rigorous tests of shooting ability on foot and from the saddle were a part of the Chinese military officers' exams until the entire traditional examination system was abolished in 1905. Although the bow had co-existed with the musket up to the mid-19th cent., we see that from that point onwards, firearms gradually supplanted it as even matchlocks began to give way to imported percussion-lock (and later breechloading) guns and rifles during the second half of the century. The impetus was undoubtedly due to unprecedented Western military pressure, which for China began with the First Opium War in the 1840s. The unavoidable move towards newer styles of firearms under these conditions can be compared to Ottoman Turkey's evolution from matchlock to flint to later firearms systems in its military under centuries of competitive pressure from a hostile Europe on its doorstep.

bluelake · 25th May 2010, 10:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Philip

Thomas,
John L. Boots, in his monograph KOREAN WEAPONS AND ARMOUR (Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, Korea Branch, 1934), mentions that of all the martial arts, archery was the most esteemed in pre-modern Korea. I find it interesting to note that this particular affection for the bow and arrow is also a defining characteristic of the martial cultures of the Manchus, Mongols, and Turks -- peoples, who along with the Koreans are members of the Ural-Altaic linguistic family. Put a Korean composite-recurved bow next to an Ottoman one and you'll see weapons of almost identical proportions (distinct from Manchu, Sino-Tibetan, and Indian bows) and performance characteristics. The Korean and Turkish weapons are known for their ability to shoot very light arrows at velocities and over distances unmatched by the bows of other nations. Our colleague Peter Dekker is a wealth of info on this subject and I suggest that you contact him if you have further interest.

Thanks, Philip, but I literally wrote the book on Korean traditional archery

My website: http://www.koreanarchery.org (my book is on the front page).

T

Dmitry · 15th June 2010, 02:58 AM

Here are some promised illustrations of the Russian style lock.

bluelake · 16th June 2010, 03:33 AM

Thanks, Dmitry. Do you think this might have been the type of lock used in the early 17 C. that the Koreans captured from the Russians?

Philip · 18th June 2010, 07:54 AM

Thank you, Dmitry, for posting these pics, especially those showing detached locks, exterior and interior views. Mechanically, these are among the earliest manifestations of flint-and-steel mechanisms on guns that are known, and it is believed that they first appeared in Scandinavia in the mid-16th cent. Blackmore (p. 28, cat. no. 134) discusses what is perhaps one of the oldest dated examples, now in Stockholm's Royal Armory and thought to be one of several guns with Nuremberg barrel marks, converted to this early flint mechanism by Swedish technicians at Arboga in 1556. This style of lock quickly spread throughout the Baltic area and not long after to Russia where they were well-known by the beginning of the 17th cent.

Strictly speaking, these locks and the examples in your pics are not true flintlocks, for reasons discussed previously. They are SNAPHAUNCES, the distinction being in the separation of the steel (which is struck by the flint) and the priming-pan cover into separate units. A true flintlock has, besides an internal mainspring and sear system, a COMBINED steel and pan-cover (the unit looks like a letter L).

Be that as it may, the examples shown here, like their Scanian counterparts, have a primitive character to them which is not only charming but speaks to their antiquity. The pan-covers are opened manually, like those on matchlocks, before firing. Some of the covers slide, others pivot like those on matchlocks. Note how the first example shown in your post has a lockplate which bulges out on the bottom. This is a hold-over from the style of lockplate on the earlier wheel-lock, it is a vestigial stylistic element which is functionally irrelevant on a snaphaunce because no wheel is necessary!

Snaphaunces were made also in Holland, Italy, and later Morocco but these are more advanced since the mechanism is provided with a push-rod and bell-crank linkage between the tumbler and pan-cover so that the cover AUTOMATICALLY opens when the gun fires. (See Blackmore, appendix, pp 112-13 for operational diagrams).

The primitive flint mecanisms had a long life in the Baltic regions and Russia as well. They remained in use in rural parts of Sweden, Finland, and Norway until the beginning of the 19th cent., and I recall reading a memoir by a Western traveler seeing them for sale in a market in western Siberia ca. 1900.

bluelake · 19th June 2010, 03:14 AM

Very good information, Philip--thanks!

Dmitry or Philip--Regarding my last question:

Quote:

Do you think this might have been the type of lock used in the early 17 C. that the Koreans captured from the Russians?

Also, Dmitry, where did you find the pictures?

Thanks, guys.

fernando · 19th June 2010, 06:11 PM

Great lectures Philip

Quote:

Originally Posted by Philip

... Snaphaunces were made also in Holland, Italy, and later Morocco but these are more advanced since the mechanism is provided with a push-rod and bell-crank linkage between the tumbler and pan-cover so that the cover AUTOMATICALLY opens when the gun fires... .

If i may hijack the thread, bluelake, attached is one rustic example of the Snaphaunce version quoted by Philip, in that the pan cover opens while you fire the gun.
I beleive this is a Moroccan specimen, possibly from the 19th century, although i ignore where the gunsmith inspired his imagination to make such a bizarre butt stock, resembling somehow those from early weel lock pistols.
Fernando

.

25th May 2010, 07:33 AM	#2
Philip Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: California Posts: 1,036	Korean reverence for archery Thomas, John L. Boots, in his monograph KOREAN WEAPONS AND ARMOUR (Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, Korea Branch, 1934), mentions that of all the martial arts, archery was the most esteemed in pre-modern Korea. I find it interesting to note that this particular affection for the bow and arrow is also a defining characteristic of the martial cultures of the Manchus, Mongols, and Turks -- peoples, who along with the Koreans are members of the Ural-Altaic linguistic family. Put a Korean composite-recurved bow next to an Ottoman one and you'll see weapons of almost identical proportions (distinct from Manchu, Sino-Tibetan, and Indian bows) and performance characteristics. The Korean and Turkish weapons are known for their ability to shoot very light arrows at velocities and over distances unmatched by the bows of other nations. Our colleague Peter Dekker is a wealth of info on this subject and I suggest that you contact him if you have further interest.

25th May 2010, 07:47 AM	#3
Philip Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: California Posts: 1,036	military role of archery Thomas, Like the Koreans, the Chinese under Qing rule maintained their tradition of military archery (at least in theory) until quite late. Rigorous tests of shooting ability on foot and from the saddle were a part of the Chinese military officers' exams until the entire traditional examination system was abolished in 1905. Although the bow had co-existed with the musket up to the mid-19th cent., we see that from that point onwards, firearms gradually supplanted it as even matchlocks began to give way to imported percussion-lock (and later breechloading) guns and rifles during the second half of the century. The impetus was undoubtedly due to unprecedented Western military pressure, which for China began with the First Opium War in the 1840s. The unavoidable move towards newer styles of firearms under these conditions can be compared to Ottoman Turkey's evolution from matchlock to flint to later firearms systems in its military under centuries of competitive pressure from a hostile Europe on its doorstep.

15th June 2010, 02:58 AM	#5
Dmitry Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 607	Here are some promised illustrations of the Russian style lock. Attached Images

18th June 2010, 07:54 AM	#7
Philip Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: California Posts: 1,036	Early Russian flint mechanisms Thank you, Dmitry, for posting these pics, especially those showing detached locks, exterior and interior views. Mechanically, these are among the earliest manifestations of flint-and-steel mechanisms on guns that are known, and it is believed that they first appeared in Scandinavia in the mid-16th cent. Blackmore (p. 28, cat. no. 134) discusses what is perhaps one of the oldest dated examples, now in Stockholm's Royal Armory and thought to be one of several guns with Nuremberg barrel marks, converted to this early flint mechanism by Swedish technicians at Arboga in 1556. This style of lock quickly spread throughout the Baltic area and not long after to Russia where they were well-known by the beginning of the 17th cent. Strictly speaking, these locks and the examples in your pics are not true flintlocks, for reasons discussed previously. They are SNAPHAUNCES, the distinction being in the separation of the steel (which is struck by the flint) and the priming-pan cover into separate units. A true flintlock has, besides an internal mainspring and sear system, a COMBINED steel and pan-cover (the unit looks like a letter L). Be that as it may, the examples shown here, like their Scanian counterparts, have a primitive character to them which is not only charming but speaks to their antiquity. The pan-covers are opened manually, like those on matchlocks, before firing. Some of the covers slide, others pivot like those on matchlocks. Note how the first example shown in your post has a lockplate which bulges out on the bottom. This is a hold-over from the style of lockplate on the earlier wheel-lock, it is a vestigial stylistic element which is functionally irrelevant on a snaphaunce because no wheel is necessary! Snaphaunces were made also in Holland, Italy, and later Morocco but these are more advanced since the mechanism is provided with a push-rod and bell-crank linkage between the tumbler and pan-cover so that the cover AUTOMATICALLY opens when the gun fires. (See Blackmore, appendix, pp 112-13 for operational diagrams). The primitive flint mecanisms had a long life in the Baltic regions and Russia as well. They remained in use in rural parts of Sweden, Finland, and Norway until the beginning of the 19th cent., and I recall reading a memoir by a Western traveler seeing them for sale in a market in western Siberia ca. 1900.

25th May 2010, 12:57 AM	#1
bluelake Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Gyeongsan, South Korea Posts: 57	Thanks, Philip! The information is greatly appreciated and very informative. I will look into the books you mentioned. It's interesting to note that, in Korea, the bow remained an official military weapon until the mid-1890s, but was probably not officially used in battle after the 1860s. In the US military incursion of 1871, although there were bows in Korea's arsenal (at least on paper), none were used and none captured by the US. In the French incursion of 1866, there is evidence they were still being used militarily and at least one was captured by the French (That bow was given to me almost a decade ago by a friend in France and I gave it to the Korean Army Museum). Thomas http://www.shinmiyangyo.org

16th June 2010, 03:33 AM	#6
bluelake Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Gyeongsan, South Korea Posts: 57	Thanks, Dmitry. Do you think this might have been the type of lock used in the early 17 C. that the Koreans captured from the Russians?